Application Comment Details


1i1qso97

Jayesh Vinay Badwaik

 

Amazon EU S.à r.l.

AMAZON

1-1315-58086

Geographic Names Evaluation Panel

Do not give .amazon to Amazon EU

25 May 2019 at 09:15:10 UTC

I wholeheartedly agree with a previous poster's comment, and so I will copy their comment here:

The proposal to grant control over .amazon to Amazon, a company based in Seattle, WA, USA, thousands of kilometres from the Amazon Basin, which does not contribute much of anything to the economies of the countries whose territories include the Amazon Basin, is seriously troublesome for multiple reasons:

* All eight countries that intersect with the Amazon oppose this TLD assignment ( https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47794353 ). These are countries that aren'y particularly wealthy, and they could do with having a strong online presence for their region - not being overshadowed even further by an American multinational.

* Amazon (the company) has many other options for TLDs that would work just as well for them - .aws, .amazonprime, .onedayshipping, .kindle, or .bezos, for example. The countries of the Amazon Basin don't really have other options for a TLD that refers to the entire bioregion.

* .amazon would be a useful TLD for all sorts of organisations that span multiple countries in the region, or community organisations that aren't particularly affiliated with a specific country - for example, indigenous nations whose territory is intersected by multiple states in the region, or who are seeking sovereignty.

* The message being sent by assigning control over .amazon to an American company is that colonised nations don't even get to have control over their own names, let alone their economies. It's a serious slap in the face to nations that have been subject to centuries of being robbed by Canada, Europe, and the US.

* This choice of TLD assignment seems incredibly silly, considering that Amazon (the company) could very well collapse in the near future; on the other hand, the Amazon Basin will still be a coherent region for centuries to come, even if the rainforest itself faces drastic changes.

This whole proposal is just outright *bad*, and control over .amazon needs to be put in the hands of the people of the Amazon Basin, not a tech giant from the Pacific Northwest. It's shameful that their proposal wasn't just outright rejected in the first place, but you still have an opportunity to do the right thing and kill the proposal after the public comment period.